Not ‘battling’ with each other.

the best way to beat Trump and this issue of whether to accept big money from corporate executives and lobbyists or not is most certainly part of the debate.

One is a super PAC operated by National Nurses United that was responsible for the $300,000 donation. The union, which did not respond to a request for comment, had previously spent nearly $4.8 million on pro-Sanders advertisements during the 2016 election, according to the Center for Responsive Politics

From opensecrets.org
https://www.opensecrets.org/pacs/indexpend.php?cycle=2016&cmte=C00490375

"Independent Expenditures, Communication Costs and Coordinated Expenses as of December 07, 2017:
Grand Total: $4,979,225
Total For Democrats: $4,979,225
Total Against Democrats: $0
Total For Republicans: $0
Total Against Republicans: $0ixteen Thirty Fund, another D.C.-based progressive nonprofit"

The other groip, Sixteen Thirty Fund, that donated $100 000 is D.C.-based progressive nonprofit.

"The Sixteen Thirty Fund is a 501(c)(4) social welfare organization that serves as a fiscal sponsor for initiatives advocating for change."
How We Help
https://www.sixteenthirtyfund.org/how-we-help/
Their Projects
https://www.sixteenthirtyfund.org/project-directory/

About the Organization
https://www.sixteenthirtyfund.org/about-the-fund/

https://www.opensecrets.org/outsidespending/detail.php?cmte=Sixteen+Thirty+Fund&cycle=2018

So the campaign should probably adress it. However the sources don't seem to be corporations like Comcast (that spent over $30 million in lobbying dollars or Insurance companies that lobby against Medicare for all.

Last edited Sun Apr 28, 2019, 04:06 PM - Edit history (1)

then ACA and at least 11 of the candidates support Medicare for all.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/politics/policy-2020/medicare-for-all/

personal wealth or non-wealth and accepting big money from corporate executives and lobbyists with the intention of influencing decisions on issues, policies and personnel.

Or where Senator Sanders has supported such a claim? Thank you!

he needs to cut some of those trees down.

He hates us. Obsessively.

Politics is a team sport, for better or for worse, and if Bernie can't work WITH the Democratic Party, he's more of a liability than an asset. I support his stands on most issues, but THE TEAM has to win, and it appears that Bernie is a Democrat ONLY when he's running for President. Naturally, this disturbs the rank-and-file members of the party.

imo.

-Laelth

I have to be careful about how I talk about this, but we have new DNC leadership, right? We have severely restricted the impact of super-delegates, right?

Because of Bernie the DNC has become a better institution, right?

-Laelth

four other candidates have also signed.

While Bernie will do everything in his power to win the nomination, he is absolutely committed to the Democratic Party taking back the White House if he doesn't.

There’s no way that I could ever believe that Bernie would want to see Trump re-elected. But I do wish that Bernie could bring himself into the party and be a team player. Apparently, that’s just not in his nature.

-Laelth

for ideas he took from other Democrats.

but he's as much a part of the "establishment" as any of the others. I have not a single fuck to give about how any of the candidates raise money for their campaigns. The GOP get most of the big donations, and as long as our candidates' contributions are legal and accounted for, I say take whatever money any donor, large or small, offers. Then they can compete without one hand tied behind their back - they can buy ads, pay staff, and use every nickel they can raise, from whatever source, to defeat Trump. If he wins again we won't get Medicare for All, we'll get Medicare for Nobody.

I hope you don’t pass out from low oxygen from your perch on top of the mountain as you look down on us proles.

They cannot accept the fact that their devotion does not carry over to mainstream Democrats and it frustrates them.

This whole "battle" is nothing but a conspiracy theory.

Now that takes a major leap into unicorns pooping skittles idealism.

Anothet poster ponted out Sanders takes dark money refusing to say where it comes from.

Itemize all the donors.

Itemize all the donors to the Sanders campaign.

"If a democrat takes big donations, that person is corrupt". BS. In 2008, after Hillary conceded, I made a maximum donation to then Senator Obama. Because I technically made that donation during the primary window, I was able to make a maximum donation during the General. I made a maximum donation in the General of 2012. I did not want ONE thing other that to see him win, because the alternative sucked. A lot of big money donors (far more than I ever will give) likely feel the same way, they give democrats big money because they don't want to see republicans leading the country. For Bernie to demonize that reality is beyond the pale.

has been in the Sanders' camp for eons.

He is known to write such divisive pieces with conspiratorial overtones. A little more and he could have a conspiracy channel of the left.

It's amazing that conservatives still can't get over their Hillary hate.

https://www.theamericanconservative.com/author/zaid-jilani/

What was he writing during the general election campaign of 2016? Was he working against the Democratic nominee or is the Hillary hate something new?

I wonder why The Intercept neglected to mention his association with The American Conservative.

about "Hillary hate" so much as a sober ideological analysis and from the OP which I posted.

As I stated it was a sober ideological analysis.

definition of "sober".

or the role it played in helping to put Trump in the White House.

The most shameful event I have ever seen in my life. And him sitting there grinning like the cat that ate the canary.

Some things should be remembered and are unforgivable.

Sid

“Bernie alienates his natural allies. His holier-than-thou attitude—saying in a very loud voice he is smarter than everyone else and purer than everyone else—really undercuts his effectiveness.”

-Laelth

...to me, it's going to be about all the other candidates and the establishment.

Last time around it was obvious and not even that unreasonable for the powers that be within the party to support Hillary over Bernie, even if I thought what Bernie was saying and doing needed to be said and done. The fact is that Hillary was a lifetime Democrat and the primary was for the nomination to the Democratic party.

This time around there are many great candidates, several of whom offer the same positions and passion and sincerity that Bernie does but who are working within the party and are registered Democrats (keep in mind, I don't even particularly care about the I vs. D issue myself but playing Devil's advocate for all the people who claimed that their only issue was that Bernie wasn't an actual registered Democrat).

To me, it will be interesting seeing how those folks who are registered Democrats are treated and whether or not there are fingers placed on the scale for one particular candidate over another (not saying who, just any candidate). That will ultimately show whether Bernie was correct in his assessments or not.

.....just JOIN the party for more than a few months every four years and work, like many of us Democrats do, to make it better?

it has made some changes for the better because of Bernie.

I think they just trying to influence the election in the US.

Who is "our ability". You ratted on yourself.

Super-delegates were one of the most un-democratic abuses to come down the pike. The DNC admitted as much by banning them on the first ballot of a disputed convention. Instead of delegates voting how they personally want to vote they are obliged to vote, NOW, for the candidate who got the most votes.

What a novel idea voting for the candidate who won.

That Bernie weakened our ability to pick the best candidates?

“Why should we work within the Democratic Party if we don’t agree with anything the Democratic Party says?”

- Socialist Scholars Conference, New York, April 1990

If he wins the delegates he needs to be nominated by the Democrats, he'll tear the shit out of Trump and win the Whitehouse for the Democrats.

But yelling about billionaires and oligarchs and wagging his finger while soaking up all of the advantages accorded a sitting Senator in politics for 35+ years (including riding the coattails and using the resources of the Democratic "establishment" to advance his presidential aspirations whenever it suits him) is not "anti-establishment."

He's just managed to fool a lot of people into thinking it is.

And, FYI - "Bernie Sanders versus the Democratic" ANYTHING is precisely The reason most Democrats want no parts of him. He's not a Democrat and he can't be trusted as an ally.

"It would be hypocritical of me to run as a Democrat because of the things I have said about the party."

- Socialist Scholars Conference, New York, April 1990.

in regards to modern day political reality in America.

Your post just reinforces that Bernie's views do change to benefit the greater good even if the result be slings and arrows hurled at him.

a Democrat, will never be a Democrat.

Then, he signs a pledge that says, "I'm a Democrat".

Q.E.D.

Or registered to run as I-VT in 2022? Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice....

(And Senator Sanders' supporters, don't bother claiming that Vermont doesn't have party registration - that's for voters, not for candidates; the Senator's Vermont colleagues have no problems being registered Democrats in Congress and on the ballot.)

If Bernie loses the nomination, he will fight tooth and nail for the Democratic nominee in the G.E.

If Bernie loses the nomination he will run for reelection to the Senate in Vermont as an Independent and if he wins, he will continue to caucus with the Democrats in the Senate.

How does any of these scenarios damage the Democratic Party?

But this depends upon how much damage Senator Sanders does to the eventual nominee before said nominee secures the Democratic Party's nomination.

-Laelth

damaging to our nation.

He's not making this personal unless he is speaking about pathological liar Trump.

-Uncle Joe

-Laelth

Anyone else, it's a sellout, flip-flop, etc.

and exploitation. He has contempt for the Democratic party and its work over the decades.

For him to expect loyalty is rich. Claiming that the establishment is against him and play the victim is richer.

Does anyone want Bernie to run as an Independent? Doesn't take much to realize the potential consequences of that. I think everyone should take a deep breath and let the process evolve.

the last time I checked four other candidates have also signed the pledge.

beat Joe Lieberman, for Senate, in the Democratic primary. Lamont was quite a bit farther left than Joe. What did Joe do, what did the DNC allow him to do next? Joe never registered as an Independent, never changed his Democratic affiliation, he ran on some concocted Joe Lieberman party in the general election, Google it. Joe ends up winning the general election and fucking up Obamacare to this day. I have to assume that the DNC may be prejudiced against candidates that lean left, at least they had no objection to allowing Lieberman to run against Lamont while Joe was still a registered Democrat. Someone help me out and explain why that happened?

This is why I shudder when I hear people say that we need moderate candidates like Joe Lieberman to beat Trump.

Joe later on endorsed John McCain and that ended his caucusing with the Democrats.

Give me FDR Democratic candidates and we will be in the majority from now till the cows come home.

and not be FDR Democrats so lost in the last century while ignoring the concerns of this century.

Because I look upon her as an FDR Democrat.
Taking care of working people and solving income inequality bridges generations doesn’t it?

solving income inequality is not your overriding concern

There are many American's who are not working people. Seniors, children, people with disabilities, and people who have to take care of seniors/children/people with disabilities actually need more support than working Americans.

I guess when you are a carpenter you think everything is a nail.

This century has many many more problems than that side of the party sees.


That is why I don't think that side of the party is more liberal, they are more focused because they are wearing blinders.

Other people would not let themselves be bought by money.

views in regards to taking big money from corporations and lobbyists.

I would think the same implicit interpretation would hold true with Elizabeth as well.

Establishment: PP, HRC, CAP, black women, women

"Watery tarts lying in ponds, distributing swords, is no basis for a system of government."

-Laelth

not from some farcical aquatic ceremony.

Thanks for the addition appalachiablue.

What a pleasure to read your threads.

Thank you for the kind words rgbecker.